Concealed device 2

[labadie_1]

I think the rule at the moment is that you can have in a path/file name ony once the string

.][

I had seen long ago

A rooted directory is designed to behave like a device and its MFD
(i.e. [000000]) directory. Asking a path name to have two rooted
directories in it is equivalent to asking a path name to have two
devices and two MFDs.

[Robert_Boyd]

One of the problems that I am picking up on in this discussion is the distinction between a simple concealed logical name and the rooted logical name construct. The implementation makes them look like you're dealing with the same thing, but when it comes to how they are used, they are not EXACTLY the same.

I would advise separating out the discussion of concealed names from the discussion about rooted names. I have often wished that the original implementation of rooted names had a separate flag bit so that the 2 types were kept distinct.

The feature that many have expressed to have supported is nested rooted names. There are probably many pros and cons for these constructs. The thing that occurs to me is that the beauty of them if they worked is that you could easily remap a set of translations at the system, group or process level by setting up a different translation for the root of a nest and have the whole set of names follow. Otherwise you have to redefine a larger set of names -- any of the rooted names that branch from the root.

I think in reading the examples that Bob Gezelter writes about, it is easy to imagine some useful creative uses of such a feature.

Robert